I didn't think intelligent people actually believed this alt-right crap.

I thought all people, which i assume includes alt-right, just want to be treated as regular human beings, presumably with dignity and respect?

Yes, that's right. It does not alter the reality that fringe alt-right political views are crap. I am surprised to encounter, for the first time, someone whom I regard as intelligent, but who believes this alt-right nonsense and accepts ridiculous views espoused by the likes of Alex Jones.

The 86-year-old has become a Rorschach test. To the left, he's a rich guy openly supporting causes many liberals believe in. But to some on the far right, he's more sinister and nefarious, despite a lack of evidence. For two decades, some have seen Soros as a kind of puppet master secretly controlling the global economy and politics.

Haven't watched the video but I see the still image: On one side it shows a bunch of white faces, and on the other some brown ones, a few of which have terrorist garb on, moving towards the white faces. This is a huge red flag - I infer that whoever made the video has a childishly simplistic understanding of the world in general, and is very like a racist (such characteristics go very well together). What do you think?

Haven't watched the video but I see the still image: On one side it shows a bunch of white faces, and on the other some brown ones, a few of which have terrorist garb on, moving towards the white faces. This is a huge red flag - I infer that whoever made the video has a childishly simplistic understanding of the world in general, and is very like a racist (such characteristics go very well together). What do you think?

The "terrorist garb" might well be a depiction of a burqa, and the still image doesn't show which way they are moving. The video might well be childishly simplistic, but that might be because it has simple cartoon figures. It might, for all I know, be an in-depth analysis of the work of Edward Said and Ibn Khaldun, illustrated in a simplistic way. I can't say that the person who made it is "very like a racist". It might turn into a "red flag" on watching it, but I can't see it at the moment.

Haven't watched the video but I see the still image: On one side it shows a bunch of white faces, and on the other some brown ones, a few of which have terrorist garb on, moving towards the white faces. This is a huge red flag - I infer that whoever made the video has a childishly simplistic understanding of the world in general, and is very like a racist (such characteristics go very well together). What do you think?

Ah not to be concerned. Even I am not white. I also thought of this but its just because of simple cartoon graphics used just to make a quick video. Yes I can agree that it can appear as a red flag and before clicking it even I had my concerns whether this is typical right wing propaganda. But it is actually seeing the actual reality of what will become of the future if people keep turning a blind eye.

Nothing stays the same - not the individual, not things, certainly not countries and cultures.

Society is not some fixed, static thing. Not a stone but a river.

People are being alarmist with respect to what is really a natural phenomenon.

These alarmist posts display a reactive response fixed on a view from the past “sensing no change in the changing” (AN 4:49) , and indicate a general inability to detect impermanence. This is one of the perversions (vipallasa). “ The characteristic of impermanence does not become apparent because when rise and fall are not given attention, it is concealed by continuity,” (Vism. XXI, 3). The remedy for this is the contemplation of the cycle of impermanence in materiality, particularly in nature and in the human body (both internally and externally), bearing in mind that the primal tendency is towards the ‘ripe’ section of the cycle, so this must be countered by intentionally focusing on the dissolution phase, i.e. ageing, sickness and death. The cycle is slow in materiality and quick in mentality, that's why it's preferable to focus on materiality, and why the first foundation of mindfulness is the body (meaning materiality generally).

Last edited by paul on Thu Nov 30, 2017 10:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

These alarmist posts display a reactive response fixed on a view from the past “sensing no change in the changing” (AN 4:49) , and indicate a general inability to detect impermanence. This is one of the perversions (vipallasa). “ The characteristic of impermanence does not become apparent because when rise and fall are not given attention, it is concealed by continuity,” (Vism. XXI, 3). The remedy for this is the contemplation of the cycle of impermanence in materiality, particularly in nature and in the human body (both internally and externally), bearing in mind that the primal tendency is towards the ‘ripe’ section of the cycle, so this must be countered by intentionally focusing on the dissolution phase, i.e. ageing, sickness and death.

Just curious... would you apply the same kind of dismissive logic to climate change, mass poverty, mass starvation, world wars etc.?

I would suggest that not conflating the two lokas (i.e. loka of the six sense spheres, and the loka which signifies the world in general) might lead to more consistency in these matters.

These alarmist posts display a reactive response fixed on a view from the past “sensing no change in the changing” (AN 4:49) , and indicate a general inability to detect impermanence. This is one of the perversions (vipallasa). “ The characteristic of impermanence does not become apparent because when rise and fall are not given attention, it is concealed by continuity,” (Vism. XXI, 3). The remedy for this is the contemplation of the cycle of impermanence in materiality, particularly in nature and in the human body (both internally and externally), bearing in mind that the primal tendency is towards the ‘ripe’ section of the cycle, so this must be countered by intentionally focusing on the dissolution phase, i.e. ageing, sickness and death.

Could you please say a bit more on how these thoughts on impermanence relate to the issue of Muslim immigration in Europe? What is it that is changing, but is thought by some to be not changing?

Just watched the video and I stand by my initial intuitive response to the still. Childishly simplistic with racist undertones, no in depth analysis, no real statistics, fear mongering and emotional appeals to nationalism...

The conversation here is probably similar to the conversations in the courtyards around Borobudur in Indonesia 700 years ago when the local Hindus and Buddhists noticed the large numbers of Arab traders in their midst. The nature of Islam is that it restricts conversion to other religions and cultures. It never assimilates, it simply overwhelms. Like it or not, that's just the way it is.

The conversation here is probably similar to the conversations in the courtyards around Borobudur in Indonesia 700 years ago when the local Hindus and Buddhists noticed the large numbers of Arab traders in their midst. The nature of Islam is that it restricts conversion to other religions and cultures. It never assimilates, it simply overwhelms. Like it or not, that's just the way it is.

So the Muslims who have been living and practicing their religion peacefully for decades in my hometown (Greater Seattle area) must be mythical creatures?

The conversation here is probably similar to the conversations in the courtyards around Borobudur in Indonesia 700 years ago when the local Hindus and Buddhists noticed the large numbers of Arab traders in their midst. The nature of Islam is that it restricts conversion to other religions and cultures. It never assimilates, it simply overwhelms. Like it or not, that's just the way it is.

But the muslims did assimilate to a degree. They assimilated to the degree that a large percent of muslims whose culture originated in the middle east do not think of those indonesia muslims as even being proper muslims.

Also, the culture of indonesia was "assimilated" to a degree in that it did not remain the same and is clearly not the same as it was but the present day indonesian culture is distinctly indonesian.....and mostly no one is complaining.

The conversation here is probably similar to the conversations in the courtyards around Borobudur in Indonesia 700 years ago when the local Hindus and Buddhists noticed the large numbers of Arab traders in their midst. The nature of Islam is that it restricts conversion to other religions and cultures. It never assimilates, it simply overwhelms. Like it or not, that's just the way it is.

So the Muslims who have been living and practicing their religion peacefully for decades in my hometown (Greater Seattle area) must be mythical creatures?

These alarmist posts display a reactive response fixed on a view from the past “sensing no change in the changing” (AN 4:49) , and indicate a general inability to detect impermanence. This is one of the perversions (vipallasa). “ The characteristic of impermanence does not become apparent because when rise and fall are not given attention, it is concealed by continuity,” (Vism. XXI, 3). The remedy for this is the contemplation of the cycle of impermanence in materiality, particularly in nature and in the human body (both internally and externally), bearing in mind that the primal tendency is towards the ‘ripe’ section of the cycle, so this must be countered by intentionally focusing on the dissolution phase, i.e. ageing, sickness and death.

Just curious... would you apply the same kind of dismissive logic to climate change, mass poverty, mass starvation, world wars etc.?

I would suggest that not conflating the two lokas (i.e. loka of the six sense spheres, and the loka which signifies the world in general) might lead to more consistency in these matters.

Metta,
Paul.

This post is not a reply to retrofuturist.
I don't know what paul would do but I would apply the same kind of logic to all those social issues. I wouldn't call the logic dismissive.....it is how one grasps the results of having applied the logic which contains the opportunity to be dismissive. It seems that when retrofuturist grasps the logic he becomes dismissive so he rejects the logic. Others grasp the logic as a first step in understanding the way things really are and as a starting point for determining a path which might lead out of the dilemma.

The conversation here is probably similar to the conversations in the courtyards around Borobudur in Indonesia 700 years ago when the local Hindus and Buddhists noticed the large numbers of Arab traders in their midst. The nature of Islam is that it restricts conversion to other religions and cultures. It never assimilates, it simply overwhelms. Like it or not, that's just the way it is.

So the Muslims who have been living and practicing their religion peacefully for decades in my hometown (Greater Seattle area) must be mythical creatures?

Huh? Could you clarify as I don't understand your question.

I think that garrib is saying that alot of muslims actually do assimilate. I lived most of my life in the usa and ALL of the muslims I knew there had assimilated. Mosly you would never know that they were muslims.....and most of them were immigrants.
chownah

It seems that when retrofuturist grasps the logic he becomes dismissive so he rejects the logic.

It seems chownah ought to speak for himself, rather than spilling even more of his erroneous conjecture all over the place. Chownah should ask if unsure, as this would be preferable to more rampant speculation which has no founding whatsoever in reality.

chownah wrote:I don't think the buddha teaches two lokas.

He does. The two main senses of loka are played at in the following riddle from the Samyutta Nikaya...

SN 35.116 wrote:‘Bhikkhus, I say that the end of the world cannot be known, seen, or reached by travelling. Yet, bhikkhus, I also say that without reaching the end of the world there is no making an end to suffering,’

...where "the world" is initially regarded in the conventional sense...

Loka [cp. Vedic loka in its oldest meaning "space, open space." For etym. see rocati. To the etym. feeling of the Pāli hearer loka is closely related in quality to ruppati (as in pop. etym. of rūpa) and rujati. As regards the latter the etym. runs "lujjati kho loko ti vuccati" S iv.52, cp. Nd2 550, and loka=lujjana DhsA 47, 308: see lujjana. The Dhtp 531 gives root lok (loc) in sense of dassana] world, primarily "visible world," then in general as "space or sphere of creation," with var. degrees of substantiality. Often (unspecified) in the comprehensive sense of "universe." Sometimes the term is applied collectively to the creatures inhabiting this or var. other worlds, thus, "man, mankind, people, beings." -- Loka is not a fixed & def. term. It comprises immateriality as well as materiality and emphasizes either one or the other meaning according to the view applied to the object or category in question. Thus a trsln of "sphere, plane, division, order" interchanges with "world." Whenever the spatial element prevails we speak of its "regional" meaning as contrasted with "applied" meaning. The fundamental notion however is that of substantiality, to which is closely related the specific Buddhist notion of impermanence (loka=lujjati). -- 1. Universe: the distinctions between the universe (cp. cakkavāḷa) as a larger whole and the world as a smaller unit are fluctuating & not definite. A somewhat wider sphere is perhaps indicated by sabba -- loka (e. g. S i.12; iv.127, 312; v.132; It 122; Mhvs 1, 44; cp. sabbāvanta loka D i.251; iii.224), otherwise even the smaller loka comprises var. realms of creation. Another larger division is that of loka as sadevaka, samāraka, sabrahmaka, or the world with its devas, its Māra and its Brahmā, e. g. S i.160, 168, 207; ii.170; iii.28, 59; iv.158; v.204; A i.259 sq.; ii.24 sq.; iii.341; iv.56, 173; v.50; It 121; Nd1 447 (on Sn 956), to which is usually added sassamaṇa -- brāhmaṇī pajā (e. g. D i.250, see loci s. v. pajā). With this cp. Dh 45, where the divisions are paṭhavī, Yamaloka, sadevaka (loka), which are expld at DhA i.334 by paṭhavī=attabhāva; Yamaloka=catubbidha apāyaloka; sadevaka=manussaloka devalokena saddhiŋ. -- The universe has its evolutional periods: saŋvaṭṭati and vivaṭṭati D ii.109 sq. The Buddha has mastered it by his enlightenment: loko Tathāgatena abhisambuddho It 121. On loka, lokadhātu (=cosmos) and cakkavāḷa cp. Kirfel, Kosmographie p. 180, 181. <-> 2. Regional meaning. -- (a) in general. Referring to this world, the character of evanescence is inherent in it; referring to the universe in a wider sense, it implies infinity, though not in definite terms. There is mention of the different metaphysical theories as regards cosmogony at many places of the Canon.

... and also in what the same Pali dictionary refers to as "loka" in the logic (vinaya) of the ariyā"

SN 35.116 wrote:That in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a conceiver of the world—this is called the world in the Noble One’s Discipline. And what, friends, is that in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a conceiver of the world? The eye is that in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a conceiver of the world . The ear … The nose … The tongue … The body … The mind is that in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a conceiver of the world. That in the world by which one is a perceiver of the world, a conceiver of the world—this is called the world in the Noble One’s Discipline.

Both uses are found in the Pali Canon, and which one is to be applied in any given translation is usually evident from the context in which the term is used. To conflate both the aryan and conventional usages and imagine them to be one and the same is to mistake and/or misrepresent the Buddha's teaching, by effectively conflating the putthujana-eye with the dhamma-eye. Both eyes can be used, depending on the situation and type of investigation and analysis being done, but not when one is confounded as to which is being used. Hence my succinct note that triggered Chownah's conceptual proliferation...

Just curious... would you apply the same kind of dismissive logic to climate change, mass poverty, mass starvation, world wars etc.?

I would suggest that not conflating the two lokas (i.e. loka of the six sense spheres, and the loka which signifies the world in general) might lead to more consistency in these matters.